标签 '媒体' 的存档

Arrogance and Ignorance

Once again, the New York Times shows its ignorance about China and Chinese. Yes, the paper successfully predicted the full retirement of a former president, but apparently when things dive deep into an identity issue, the Times does not know what it is talking about.

In an editorial published today, titled The Torch and Freedom, the paper “kindly” offered help to China:

Stop arresting dissidents. Stop spreading lies about the Dalai Lama, and start talking to him about greater religious and cultural freedoms for Tibet. Stop being an enabler to Sudan in its genocide in Darfur. In other words, start delivering on the pledge you made to the International Olympic Committee to respect human rights — which, by the way, include the freedom of expression and the freedom of assembly.

The editorial went on trying to explain why the Times is being resented by many Chinese:

Just so, the Communist authorities in China have been fanning nationalist resentments among their citizens with claims that protests against their repressive policies are staged by hostile foreign forces bent on ruining China’s grand Olympic party. The popular anger then makes it easier for the regime to arrest dissidents, stifle the news media and blame a “Dalai Lama clique” abroad for the troubles in Tibet.

This fits exactly into what I described as “arrogant westerners” in my last blog post. These westerners simply believe they know what Chinese are thinking, and hope they could get support from Chinese. When they don’t, they blame Chinese government for “fanning nationalism”.

It is especially interesting reading “stop spreading lies about the Dalai Lama”. The paper seems sure about its knowledge about Dalai. Unfortunately however, I doubt any serious academic work, even books and papers published in western world, was read by the Times’ editors. If they did read any, they would find Dalai is almost as much to blame as Chinese government in the current dilemma. Still, the only reason I can think of as why the Times blame Chinese government wholly for the Tibet problem is simply the paper’s preference. The Times just doesn’t believe what communists said.

I am Chinese but I am not communist. I read the Times and other American and European papers regularly and I would like to write about my opinion here. I’m interested to see if I would also be labeled as “brain-washed” Chinese just because I wrote something different. Below are my responses to the Times’ “help”:

  • Stop arresting dissidents.
    Sounds not bad. Only Chinese doesn’t care about this issue that much. Chinese know about these dissidents, but usually don’t care a lot. Political liberty is being discussed, sometimes even by the Government itself, yet most Chinese simply are not interested in the topic. You constantly read about this topic on the Times? Surprise! Isn’t that the Times’ “preference”?
  • Stop spreading lies about the Dalai Lama, and start talking to him about greater religious and cultural freedoms for Tibet.
    Well, Chinese government might not tell the whole story, but neither does your lovely “spiritual leader”. Read some serious work before making irresponsible judgments! Finding out why previously talks stalled and why Chinese government doesn’t trust Dalai from an independent source! (Which excludes Dalai’s followers as well as the Chinese Government!!!)
    Compared with American, yes, Tibetans may enjoy less religious and cultural freedom, but if compared with other Chinese, I don’t see they enjoy anything less. As compared with what they enjoyed under Dalai’s rule; of course they used to have what Dalai called “freedom”—it was “freedom” to warship Dalai under his rule! Tibet was then theocratic and Dalai considered Tibetan’s god!! Why do you think Dalai want a “free” Tibet? Think about Iran’s theocracy!!!
    Regarding reserving Tibetan culture, the risk it is facing is actually from globalization instead of Han Chinese. In fact, Han Chinese are busy worrying about their own culture reservation. Kicking all the Han Chinese and muslims out of Tibet might help to reduce the influence of the modern society, but unless Tibetans lock themselves from the outside world, there is no way to maintain the “purity” of their culture. Aren’t exiled Tibetan youth in India following Dalai meeting a similar problem? Can we say Dalai is committing his own “Cultural Genocide” to his fellow Tibetans?
  • Stop being an enabler to Sudan in its genocide in Darfur. In other words, start delivering on the pledge you made to the International Olympic Committee to respect human rights — which, by the way, include the freedom of expression and the freedom of assembly.
    Again, Chinese doesn’t care about Darfur much, neither about human rights issues. Without Renaissance, we simply don’t have that kind of culture, at least for the moment. Haven’t you found out the Times write only about a few dissidents consistently. I guess that’s basically China’s whole dissident community already!
    Talking about human rights, yes, China has many issues. But things are indeed getting better, and Chinese government is delivering its commitment to some extent. Only 30 years ago, people were executed without even trial, and now Chinese are already talking about “rule of law”. The government’s response to the riot is already with unprecedented restraint. We can and should expect more. But over one single night and China turns a democracy? It’s simply impossible! Keep in mind it was until 1965, roughly 100 years after the Civil War, when the African-American got the real voting rights!
  • The Communist authorities in China have been fanning nationalist resentments among their citizens…
    Judged by western standard, Chinese might be considered as nationalistic. But it is a way much complicated issue rooted deeply in Chinese culture and history, not over-simplified Government’s fanning. I explained a little bit in my last blog post.

Other than showing its arrogance and ignorance, this editorial of the Times is nothing constructive but misleading its readers, fanning resentments from Chinese or widening gap between westerners and Chinese. The Times itself should try something suggested to Chinese about the Tibet issue — Understand a different culture!

Stupid! It’s about Identity!

Some arrogant westerners always feel pathetic for Chinese - Poor Chinese, you are so brain-washed by your government that you have no idea what is happening out there. There is Darfur, there is human rights violation, and most recently, there is Tibet! How can you still support the “Genocide Olympics”? You must have been misguided by your “state-controlled media”. What? There is spontaneous anti-western media campaign? Then the state-controlled media must have stirred “nationalism” so successfully!

Unfortunately, that’s not necessarily true. For Chinese, or should I say basically for all Chinese around me (including myself) to be precise, we are truly supporting Beijing Olympics deep in our heart (not in Orwellian way as someone may respond quickly), we don’t care Darfur that much, and we believe Tibet WAS, IS and SHOULD ALWAYS BE a part of China. To the contrary of some westerners would have predicted, if China were a democracy, the government would still have done exactly the same thing as what it is doing right now about Tibet, simply because any government in China can not afford the consequences of losing Tibet. You can take the late Qing Dynasty as an example.

The problem is not about democracy, the problem is about Chinese identity. Some western media accuse Chinese government deliberately fueling “nationalism” by constantly emphasizing the invasion of western countries and Japan in late 19th century and early 20th century, but that’s not the whole story. This kind of “nationalism” is widely viewed as patriotism in China. It roots in China’s long Confucius culture. This sentiment spurred after the First Opium War, in which China was defeated by Britain. (At the time, Tibet was ruled by the Qing Dynasty.) Since then, territory integrity had become one key pillar for ideas of China’s reformers and revolutionists. That’s why the Hundred Days’ Reform happened right after China’s defeat by Japan in the First Sino-Japanese War, because of which Taiwan was taken by Japan from China; that’s why one of Sun Yet-sen’s famous Three Principles of the People includes nationalism. It is not bluffing when Chinese government announced “People’s War” towards pro-Tibet-independence clique. The government indeed has the support of most Chinese.

I feel ashamed for the western media, especially the American ones, and I am so disappointed myself as I always believe in independent media. Western media disappoint me most as they trust Dalai without any proof while they defy Chinese government’s interpretation for no good reason as well. It seems they choose whom to believe just by their preference. When they quote Dalai, they quote whatever he said, but when they quote Chinese government or Han Chinese, they wrote specifically “the story couldn’t be independently corroborated”. Come on! Since Chinese government has kicked out all foreign media (presumedly independent by many western media) as western media reported, how can they “independently corroborate” what Dalai said? ! Why not emphasize this point when they quote Dalai? The only explanation I can think of is western media simply interpret “communists” as bad. That’s all! And they declare this is independent and professional journalism! Some western columnists even judge Chinese in a way as if they are superior than Chinese. How ironic! Isn’t it exactly what westerners accuse Chinese government is doing towards Tibetan?

Yes, I complain about a lot of things in China. Actually I just complained about Beijing Olympics Organizing Committee (BOCOG) as well as Bank of China, the Olympics official sponsor, in my last blog post. But I am still enthusiastic about the games myself and I still consider Tibet an indispensable part of China. Once again it is nothing else but about Chinese identity. Live with that!

公民记者?

最近,公民记者似乎是一个热门话题。由头是在重庆“钉子户”事件中,一个叫左拉的博客在传递现场情况中起到了重要的作用。公民记者的意思大约是说,伴随这互联网的出现和发展,普通公民在亲身经历了事件后可以透过网络,记述并分享自己的所见所闻,并从中起到了传统上只有媒体记者才能够起到的作用。

公民记者的出现,为大家提供了一个不同于传统媒体的视角看待事件,对于中国这样媒体生态的国家尤其有他特别的意义。一些难以在传统媒体上看到的角度和观点,也可以透过“公民记者”这个渠道来看到。从这个意义上讲,公民记者是会促进社会发展的。

但是,另一方面,互联网的出现极大的降低了上网传递信息的门槛,在互联网上传播的信息极有可能是鱼龙混杂的。网络在方便我们获得信息的同时,又加大了我们辨别信息的难度,对于“公民记者”所提供的信息就更是如此了。

对于传统媒体,如报社、电视台等专业的新闻传播机构,出于自身公信力的考虑,在报道新闻事件时,是相对负责任的。经常报道假新闻的媒体,在读者心目中是不会有什么公信力的,在媒体竞争日趋激烈现代社会,公信力不足就意味着读者数量的下降,直接影响着媒体从业者的饭碗。但对“公民记者”来说,其对事件的报道很可能是一次性的,这就很难防止其在行文过程中夹杂着大量的从作者个人角度出发的描述,对读者来说难免产生有倾向性的误导。

当然,对于某个特定的长期“公民记者”来讲,为了维护其自身的可信度(也是一种公信力),在文章中“客观性”也是可以得到一定的体现的。况且传统媒体也有其固有的角度甚至倾向性。不过整体而言,相比较于传统媒体,“公民记者”报道的倾向性是更难以判断的。举个例子,《人民日报》报道某领导人过世,同时你不认识的某个自称某医院护士的家伙告诉你相反的事情,你会更相信哪个呢?在你做出判断的时候,你是否考虑并比较了《人民日报》和那个陌生人的立场和他们的公信力呢?

对同一事件,如果存在着大量“公民记者”从不同角度的报道,对我们全面理解事件还是大有裨益的。但我们仍应该留一个心眼儿,注意一下作者们是否具有相似的背景。倘若你发现互联网上一片对“政府全额补贴上网费用”的赞誉声时,不妨想想有没有不能上网而更需要这笔钱的群体存在,他们(如果可以发出声音的话)又会发出什么样的声音。

最近在读一个叫一五一十部落的网站,在鼓励中文互联网上的公民记者,有兴趣的可以去看一看。

标签: ,